• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Artificially aged (relic) basses, what's the point?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Isn't TB wonderful? A brother/sister hood of understanding and mutual respect for our preferences. Except that many of those that don't like relic finishes seem to get their panties in a wad over something that's no different than liking a specific color. Stolen valor? Really? Some folks need a chill pill. :)

I find it interesting that the admirers of relics seem to be generally complimentary of relics and non-relics alike. Guess we are more open-minded. :thumbsup:
 
Disclaimer: Like I say in all these threads, if you are into relic finishes and enjoy them, dont worry about what anybody else thinks

For the sake of discussion: Some of us just dont get the logic......To use that analogy about wear-n-tear being 'just a finish', rust and dents could be considered finish choices on an automobile......I cant say Ive ever been to an auto show with a vehicle covered in dents or rust...So, at this point, it really is more than just a finish option....Its imitation history or faux street cred ( I can go further and say it is a blatant lie, and this is the crux of it), and this is what many of us dont get or understand (refer to Disclaimer above before responding)

Go on Youtube and search the guy who shot himself in the face to look more gangsta'....thats what its like for many of us
You want to talk about a blatant lie? I checked my tobacco burst bass' finish...not one trace of tobacco in it!
 
Just a reminder in case one is needed; at the Bass Forum Rules sticky at the top of this section, you will find the following:

Since artificially aging an instrument (i.e. relicing) is, at least visually, no different than artificially coloring an instrument (i.e. painting) any posts or threads insulting such procedures are hereby banned under the "no insulting ugly instruments" rule that has been the long-standing policy here at talkbass. You're welcome to give your own personal reasons why you don't like the look of worn instruments, however they ended up in that condition, but slagging the instruments or the players who play them is going to jeopardize your posting abilities here.

Make a note of this. If you don't approve of someone else's finish choice, keep it to yourself, or if you absolutely -must- vent your opinion, tell them privately.

Not saying anyone is crossing the line, but just a word to the wise for any newbies.
 
Isn't TB wonderful? A brother/sister hood of understanding and mutual respect for our preferences. Except that many of those that don't like relic finishes seem to get their panties in a wad over something that's no different than liking a specific color. Stolen valor? Really? Some folks need a chill pill. :)

I find it interesting that the admirers of relics seem to be generally complimentary of relics and non-relics alike. Guess we are more open-minded. :thumbsup:
Case in point: there are a few brands with the ugliest designs imaginable, IMHO. However, there are many fans of these brands. Because they get enjoyment out them their choice should be respected. More power to them. Why pee on someone's parade? Different strokes and all that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Garret Graves
Not saying anyone is crossing the line, but just a word to the wise for any newbies.

Yeah, that other thread went bye bye...it was a little heated but I thought everyone on both sides of the aisle were pretty civil so Im not sure why it went away....This is such a taboo subject here but, in bass circles, it has a very broad scope where the topic should be allowed for discussion
 
Just a reminder in case one is needed; at the Bass Forum Rules sticky at the top of this section, you will find the following:

Since artificially aging an instrument (i.e. relicing) is, at least visually, no different than artificially coloring an instrument (i.e. painting) any posts or threads insulting such procedures are hereby banned under the "no insulting ugly instruments" rule that has been the long-standing policy here at talkbass. You're welcome to give your own personal reasons why you don't like the look of worn instruments, however they ended up in that condition, but slagging the instruments or the players who play them is going to jeopardize your posting abilities here.

Make a note of this. If you don't approve of someone else's finish choice, keep it to yourself, or if you absolutely -must- vent your opinion, tell them privately.

Not saying anyone is crossing the line, but just a word to the wise for any newbies.
That dead horse is really a Phoenix...keeps rising eternally.
 
Why did I buy my roadworn?. Because it's the closest thing to a pre CBS Jazz that I'll ever be able to afford.
Nitro lacquer finish
Flatsawn neck with no carbon rods
Vintage fretboard radius
Very smooth "worn in" feeling to the neck and body that encourages playing
Vintage style tuners but with a much finer gear ratio
65CA82C5-41E5-4803-82C3-8393748290A0.jpeg
 
+1. It's like a guy who never served in the military pinning a medal on his chest and claiming he earned it on the battlefield. Manufactured mojo is bad karma.

And no thanks to the popcorn; I'm on a diet.

That argument really doesn't make sense. Would you say the same thing about someone who had enough cash to buy a real pre CBS Fender in the same condition as a modern relic? Would that guy be posing? What's the difference?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.